Excerpt from Essay :

Perfect Position

Leadership Style & Theories, Self-Assessment

Resources: Leadership in Organizations, Organizational Behavior

To be understood and be believed as fully accountable, any individual must convincingly convey an affective as well as truly influential vision of the future for the organization, or subdivision / sub-directive of this organization, to project that needed charisma. When the subject in question can align his or her behavior alongside the principles of these values as a charismatic leader, then, is the first step to conquer in being believed to live up to the depiction projected. This individual must display a character for everyone in the room to befriend; must draw the imagery of that charismatic personality that everyone will both want to resemble or simulate in style, as well as assist in the here-and-now.

Compare and contrast leadership theories in the textbooks to gain understanding of relevant theories to your leadership approach:

Representative of the key behaviors inherent within three main stages of this leadership process are clearly outlined in Charismatic leadership in organizations. Conger and Kanungo (1998) developed a theory of charismatic leadership. All the Charismatic Leadership publications (as listed below), altogether eight from 1987 to 1999, combined serve as a preeminent (by no means superfluous) sequence of lessons by which to Concerning charismatic leaders who are often thought to emerge in times of crisis, the effects of evaluation stress and situational crisis on task performance and ratings of charismatic behavior, as assessed by outside coders on Conger and Kanungo's C-K Scale. Fifty-five three-member groups were randomly assigned a leader and asked to complete a project planning task. Half of the groups were randomly assigned to a stress condition, and all groups underwent a midsession crisis intervention. Results showed that leaders in the stress condition were perceived as significantly more charismatic than leaders in the no-stress condition, although ratings converged after the crisis manipulation.

In the initial stage, these leaders determine all possibilities and opportunities to be explored. In particular, these leaders consider the opportunities and constraints in the environment as well as the needs and preferences of members of their workgroup. During the second stage, charismatic leaders promulgate an inspiring vision to accommodate these opportunities and preferences. Finally, during the third stage, charismatic leaders implement this vision, motivating followers to pursue these objectives. In particular, these leaders engage in personal risk, partly to inspire followers through role modeling, as well as demonstrate unconventional behavior.

By definition, the dictum "Recent Research" indicates that charismatic leadership is frequently registered as a particular facet within a broader concept of transformational leadership, though not effective in all contexts. With charismatic leadership, however, the economic potential of organizations tends to improve. Moreover, the attitudes and behavior of employees will undoubtedly improve. These employees will then feel more committed to the organization and become more motivated to behave cooperatively.

Identify strengths and weaknesses of your leadership style by applying what you learned about yourself through self-assessments.

My Credentials:

As a valued, veteran employee, I currently have the great advantage of determining the position that best suits this expanding and restructuring company. Accordingly I have better defined the role in which I may most benefit the company and be most successful.

With the score of 13, high score suggests that I demonstrate charismatic leadership behaviors. In terms of my Listening Skills results, with a score of 52, this high score suggests that as leader I am a better listener. This denotes my ability to discern when to observe and calculate, rather then blindly (and ignorantly) delve into uncertainty; in Layman's terms, I know better when not to "take a gamble" and risk complete sabotage. In addition, in terms of disciplining others, a score 15 indicates that I have excellent skills in disciplining. On the trustworthy scale, my score of 49 entails that others perceive me as a trustworthy leader. These are clearly signals of my role as a charismatic leader.

In terms of Leadership Style, this assessment suggests my level of task and people-oriented skills. After completing this, I learned that I need improvement on being task-oriented more than people-oriented; this simply entails that I would better prosper with time-management specialist and an accountant. With the score of 9 for task-oriented, a low score due to high score, which suggests high skill of task-oriented, is 10 or above and low score is set at below 10. Task-oriented concerns while completing tasks: I have always thought of myself as being more task-oriented, thus, the result really surprises me. A task-oriented leader always focused on reaching the goals of the organization by ensuring that all tasks are complete. To improve from the score of 9, I need to be a little stricter on employees and not so lenient with letting things slide.

In terms of on-task experiences, I worked for a non-profit organization. While recently completing a position as case manager, I processed refugees' food stamps, as well as setup an apartment and seek employment for them; I was presented with the unique opportunity of determining the position that best suits others; etc.

Factors that moderate the benefits of charismatic leadership: Though charismatic leadership is especially evident after accidents at work, particularly when individuals reflect upon their own mortality, setting clear, attainable goals from the outset is clearly more linear, especially for the task-oriented individual. Individuals like me are more inclined to prefer charismatic leaders who clearly communicate before pursuing an inspiring vision of the goal, than other managers after they imagine plummeting to an unforeseen death. These individuals are less inclined to productively work under leaders who strive to seek and integrate the opinion of all employees and managers. A clear strategy and project plan with well-defined objectives and outcomes keep both the employee and management better focused. One of the first steps in any project is establishing mutually-agreed upon and well-defined scope. Ownership of the project by executive team and middle management is also paramount, especially in managing the impact of changes to the organization.

Describe your leadership style and identify jobs in your organization that would fit with that style in a paper:

In terms of Leadership Style, this assessment suggests my level of task and people-oriented skills. After completing this, I learned that I need improvement on being task-oriented more than people-oriented; this simply entails that I would better prosper with time-management specialist and an accountant. With the score of 9 for task-oriented, a low score due to high score, which suggests high skill of task-oriented, is 10 or above and low score is set at below 10. Task-oriented concerns while completing tasks: I have always thought of myself as being more task-oriented, thus, the result really surprises me. A task-oriented leader always focused on reaching the goals of the organization by ensuring that all tasks are complete. To improve from the score of 9, I need to be a little stricter on employees and not so lenient with letting things slide.

Banker (Investment and Asset Manager)

Operation Manager

Chef

Accountant

Bookeeper

Medical Assistant

Administrative

Clerical

Hotel Manager

Web Developer

Pharmaceutical Sales Representative

From Charismatic Leadership in Crisis Situations a Laboratory Investigation of Stress and Crisis,

Charismatic leaders are often thought to emerge in times of crisis. This study examined the effects of evaluation stress and situational crisis on task performance and ratings of charismatic behavior, as assessed by outside coders on Conger and Kanungo's C-K Scale. Fifty-five three-member groups were randomly assigned a leader and asked to complete a project-planning task. Half of the groups were randomly assigned to a stress condition, and all groups underwent a midsession crisis intervention. Results showed that leaders in the stress condition were perceived as significantly more charismatic than leaders in the no-stress condition, although ratings converged after the crisis manipulation.